The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1887-09-01
LEGAL LORE.
Decision on the Question of Com-
pell;ng Railways to Produce
Their Books.
The Great Principle of Personal
Security of the Citizens
Involved.

SAN FRANoIsoo, August 30.-In his opin-
ion, deciding the Pacific commission can
not compel the surrender of the Central
Pacific books, Justice Field, of the United
States supreme court, said: Sew rights
are of greater Importance or more essen
tial to the citizens peace and happiness
than the right of personal security, and
that inv, Ives not merely the protection of
his person from assault, but the exemp-
tion of his private affairs, books and
papers from the inspection and scru-
| tiny of others. Without the enjoy
ment of this right, all other
| rights would lose half their value. The
law provides for compulsory production
in the progress of judicial proceedings,
as by direct suit for that purpose, of such
documents as affect the interest of others,
and also, in certain cases for seizure of
eliminating papers necessary for the
prosecution of offenders against public
Justice, and only in one of these ways
can they be obtained, and their contents
made known against the will of the
owner. The act of congress not only
authorizes searching investigation into
the methods, affairs and business of the
Central Pacific Railroad company, but ii
makes it the duty of the railroad commits
sion to enquire into and ascertain and
report whether any of the directors, Off
GERS or employees of that company have
been or are now directly or indirectly
interested, and to what amount or extent
in any other railroad, steamship, tele-
graph, express, mining, construction OF
other business company or corporation
and with which any agreements, under
taking or lease has been made or entered
into. There are over one hundred officers,
principal and minor, of the Central Pa
cific Railroad company, and nearly 5000
employees It is not reasonable to sup
pose that a large portion of them have
some interest, as stockholders or other
wise in some other company or corpora
ton, with which railway company they
may have an agreement of some kind,
and it would be difficult to state the ex-
tent to which the exploration of the com
mission into the private affairs of these
persons may not go, if the mandate of the
act could be fully carried ont The COM
mission is limited in its inquiries to the
interest of these directors and officers in
any other business company or cor
poration to such matters as these persons
may choose to disclose.
"They cannot be compelled to open their
books and expose such other business and
to examination of the commission with
reference to the business respecting
which the principal interrogatories are
propounded, and to which we are asked to
pei answers from the witness. 1t is
conceded by the commissioners on this
motion that monies covered by them we're
not charged against the United States in
adjusting the accounts of the company.
If such was the case it is difficult to see
what interest the United States can have
in the disposition of these monies
Be that as it may, the
general courts cannot, upon that
concession, aid the commission in ascer-
tanning how the monies were expended
and cannot become the instrument of the
commission in furthering the investiga
tion. The act of congress creating the
railroad commission, in terms, provides
as already stated, that it may invoke the
aid of any circuit or district court tC
require the attendance of witnesses, anC
the production of books and papers ant
documents relating to the subject OF
l
inquiry, and empowers the court for con
tumacy or refusal of persons to obey
subpenas to them to issue orders re.
quiring them to appear before the com
missloners, or either of them, and produce
the books and papers ordered, and give
evidence touching the matters in question
and punish disobedience to its orders
and it does not appear to leave any
discretion in the matter with the court
The federal courts cannot be made instru
ments to aid the commissioners in thei
Investigations, and it also renders it un
necessary to make any comment upon thu
extraordinary position taken by them
According to the statement of the re
spondent, to which we have referred, they
did not regard themselves bound in theil
examination by the ordinary rules of evi
dence, but would receive hearsay and ex
parte statements, surmises and Informa
ton of every character that might b,
called to their attention. 1t cannot bt
that the courts of the United States car
be used for the furtherance of an investi
CATION in which all the rules of evidenc,
may be thus disregarded."
Judges Sawyer and Sabin read concur
ring opinions.
NEW YORK POLITICS.